Notice of Final Federal Agency Actions on Proposed Highway in Indiana, 21940-21943 [2011-9420]

Download as PDF mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 21940 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 75 / Tuesday, April 19, 2011 / Notices depicted on a noise exposure map submitted under section 47503 of the Act, it should be noted that the FAA is not involved in any way in determining the relative locations of specific properties with regard to the depicted noise contours, or in interpreting the noise exposure maps to resolve questions concerning, for example, which properties should be covered by the provisions of section 47506 of the Act. These functions are inseparable from the ultimate land use control and planning responsibilities of local government. These local responsibilities are not changed in any way under Part 150 or through FAA’s review of noise exposure maps. Therefore, the responsibility for the detailed overlaying of noise exposure contours onto the map depicting properties on the surface rests exclusively with the airport operator that submitted those maps, or with those public agencies and planning agencies with which consultation is required under section 47503 of the Act. The FAA has relied on the certification by the airport operator, under section 150.21 of Part 150, that the statutorily required consultation has been accomplished. The FAA has formally received the noise compatibility program for the Lambert-St. Louis International Airport, also effective on April 5, 2011. Preliminary review of the submitted material indicates that it conforms to the requirements for the submittal of noise compatibility programs, but that further review will be necessary prior to approval or disapproval of the program. The formal review period, limited by law to a maximum of 180 days, will be completed on or before October 2, 2011. The FAA’s detailed evaluation will be conducted under the provisions of section 150.33 of Part 150. The primary considerations in the evaluation process are whether the proposed measures may reduce the level of aviation safety, create an undue burden on interstate or foreign commerce, or be reasonably consistent with obtaining the goal of reducing existing non-compatible land uses and preventing the introduction of additional non-compatible land uses. Interested persons are invited to comment on the proposed program with specific reference to these factors. All relevant comments, other than those properly addressed to local land use authorities, will be considered by the FAA to the extent practicable. Copies of the noise exposure maps, the FAA’s evaluation of the maps, and the proposed noise compatibility program are available for examination at the following locations: VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:19 Apr 18, 2011 Jkt 223001 Federal Aviation Administration, Central Region Airports Division, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106– 2325, from 7:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. Jan Titus, St. Louis Airport Authority, Lambert-St. Louis International Airport, Airport Planning & Development, 11495 Navaid Road, Bridgeton, Missouri 63044, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Questions may be directed to the individual named above under the heading, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Louisville District, United States Army Corps of Engineers, P.O. Box 59, Louisville, KY 40201–0059; telephone: (502) 315–6685; e-mail: gregory.a.mckay@usace.army.mil. Normal business hours are 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., e.t. You may also contact Mr. Thomas Seeman, Project Manager, Indiana Department of Transportation (INDOT), 100 North Senate Avenue, Indianapolis, IN 46204; telephone: (317) 232–5336; e-mail: TSeeman@indot.IN.gov. Normal business hours for the Indiana Department of Transportation are: 8 a.m. Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, April 5, to 4:30 p.m., e.t. 2011. Jim A. Johnson, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that the FHWA and other Manager, Central Region Airports Division. Federal agencies have taken final agency [FR Doc. 2011–9382 Filed 4–18–11; 8:45 am] actions by issuing licenses, permits, and BILLING CODE 4910–13–P approvals for the highway projects in the State of Indiana that are listed DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION below. The actions by the Federal agencies on a project, and the laws Federal Highway Administration under which such actions were taken, are described in the Record of Decision Notice of Final Federal Agency Actions (ROD), Reevaluation Documents to the on Proposed Highway in Indiana final environmental impact statements (FEIS) issued in connection with the AGENCY: Federal Highway projects, Section 404 Discharge of Administration (FHWA), DOT. Dredged or Fill Material Permit and ACTION: Notice of limitation on claims Regional General Permit letters, and in for judicial review of actions by FHWA other documents in the FHWA and United States Army Corps of administrative record for the project. Engineers (USACE), DoD. The ROD and other documents from the SUMMARY: This notice announces actions FHWA administrative record files for taken by the FHWA and the USACE that the listed projects are available by are final within the meaning of 23 contacting the FHWA or the Indiana U.S.C. 139(l)(1). The actions relate to Department of Transportation (INDOT) proposed highway projects for a 28.7 at the addresses provided above. Project mile segment of I–69 in the Counties of information may also be available Gibson, Pike and Daviess, State of through the INDOT I–69 Project Web Indiana, and grant licenses, permits, and site at https://www.i69indyevn.org/. approvals for the project. People unable to access the Web site DATES: By this notice, the FHWA is may contact FHWA or INDOT at the advising the public of final agency addresses listed above. This notice actions subject to 23 U.S.C. 139(l)(1) and applies to all Federal agency decisions are final within the meaning of that law. on the listed project as of the issuance A claim seeking judicial review of those date of this notice and all laws under Federal agency actions that are covered which such actions were taken, by this notice will be barred unless the including but not limited to: 1. National claim is filed on or before October 16, Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) [42 2011. If the Federal law that authorizes U.S.C. 4321–4351]. 2. Endangered judicial review of a claim provides a Species Act [16 U.S.C. 1531–1544]. 3. time period of less than 180 days for Federal-Aid Highway Act [23 U.S.C. 109 filing such claim, then the shorter time and 23 U.S.C. 128]. 4. Clean Air Act, 42 period applies. U.S.C. 7401–7671(q). 5. Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For the FHWA: Ms. Michelle Allen, Federal 1966 [49 U.S.C. 303]. 6. Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of Highway Administration, Indiana 1966, as amended [16 U.S.C. 470(f) et Division, 575 North Pennsylvania seq.]. 7. Bald and Golden Eagle Street, Room 254, Indianapolis, IN 46204–1576; telephone: (317) 226–7344; Protection Act [16 U.S.C. 688–688d]. 8. Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251–1377 e-mail: Michelle.Allen@dot.gov. The FHWA Indiana Division Office’s normal (Section 404, Section 402, Section 401, Section 319). Previous actions taken by business hours are 7:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., the USFWS for the Tier 1, I–69 project, e.t. For the USACE: Mr. Greg McKay, Chief, North Section Regulatory Branch, pursuant to the Endangered Species Act, PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19APN1.SGM 19APN1 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 75 / Tuesday, April 19, 2011 / Notices 16 U.S.C. 1531–1544, included its concurrence with the FHWA’s determination that the I–69 project was not likely to adversely affect the eastern fanshell mussel (Cyprogenia stegaria) and that the project was likely to adversely affect, but not jeopardize, the bald eagle. The USFWS also concluded that the project was not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the Indiana bat and was not likely to adversely modify the bat’s designated Critical Habitat. These USFWS decisions were described in the Programmatic Biological Opinion issued on December 3, 2003, the Revised Programmatic Biological Opinion issued on August 24, 2006, and other documents in the Tier 1 project records. A Notice of Limitation on Claims for Judicial Review of these actions and decisions by the USFWS, DOI, was published in the Federal Register on April 17, 2007. A claim seeking judicial review of the Tier 1 decisions must have been filed by October 15, 2007, to avoid being barred under 23 U.S.C. 139(l). The projects subject to this notice are: 1. Project: Section 1 of the I–69 highway project from Evansville to Indianapolis. Location: I–64 just north of Evansville to just north of SR 64 west of Oakland City. Notice is hereby given that, subsequent to the earlier FHWA notice, the FHWA has taken final agency actions within the meaning of 23 U.S.C. 139(l)(1) by approving three (3) Reevaluations of the Tier 2, Section 1 Record of Decision issued on December 12, 2007. Section 1 of the I–69 project extends from I–64 just north of Evansville to just north of SR 64 west of Oakland City. Section 1 is a new alignment, fully access-controlled highway. As approved in the Tier 1 ROD, the corridor is generally 2000-feet wide. The ROD selected Preferred Alternative 4 for Section 1, as described in the I–69 Evansville to Indianapolis, Indiana, Tier 2 Final Environmental Impact Statement, Evansville to Oakland City, Indiana (FEIS), available at https://www.i69indyevn.org/ section1_FEIS.html. The ROD also approved the locations of the interchanges, grade separations, and access roads (which include new roads, road relocations, and realignments). On February 1, 2008, the FHWA published a ‘‘Notice of Limitation on Claims for Judicial Review of Actions by FHWA and United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), DOI’’ in the Federal Register at (73 FR 6241–01) for the Section 1, 13.1 mile segment of I–69 in the Counties of Warrick and Gibson. A claim seeking judicial review of the Tier 2, Section 1 decisions must have been filed by July 30, 2008, to avoid being VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:19 Apr 18, 2011 Jkt 223001 barred under 23 U.S.C. 139(l). The three (3) Reevaluations of the Tier 2, Section 1 ROD include: (1) The March 20, 2009 Reevaluation, which was prepared to evaluate the effects of additional rightof-way and improvements (including right-of-way required for bank stabilization, drainage improvements, guard-rail, cul-de-sacs, and a potential levee) made necessary based on final design that were not analyzed in the Tier 2 Section 1 ROD or FEIS (approved December 12, 2007); (2) the December 13, 2010 Reevaluation, which was prepared to evaluate the impacts of additional right-of-way areas (including right-of-way required to accommodate cul-de-sac construction, right-of-way shift to avoid a stream channel, stream channel realignment and tree planting, berm construction around existing oil storage tanks, driveway construction, interchange and grade modifications, and flood easements) made necessary based on final design that were not analyzed in the Tier 2 Section 1 ROD or FEIS (approved December 12, 2007); and (3) the February 17, 2011 Reevaluation, which was prepared to evaluate the impacts of additional rightof-way areas (including right-of-way required to accommodate cul-de-sac construction, building removal, cut sections through hills, driveway reconstruction, interchange modifications, erosion control, fill-in remainder portions of impacted ponds, construction of a connector road, drainage easements, and revised rightof-way to even station and offset) made necessary based on final design that were not analyzed in the Tier 2 Section 1 ROD or FEIS (approved December 12, 2007). The analysis in each of the Reevaluations supports the FHWA’s conclusions that none of the changes examined will have impacts sufficient to require preparation of a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) or an additional Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for Section 1, and therefore that the Tier 2 Section 1 FEIS and ROD remain valid. The detailed analysis of the reevaluation documents along with the Federal decision of minimal impact can be found on the project Web site at https://www.i69indyevn.org/ reevaluation.html. 2. Project: Section 2 of the I–69 highway project from Evansville to Indianapolis. Location: Oakland City, Indiana to Washington, Indiana, Gibson, Pike and Daviess Counties. On August 13, 2010, the FHWA published a ‘‘Notice of Final Federal Agency Actions on Proposed Highway in Indiana’’ in the Federal Register at (75 FR 49547) for the PO 00000 Frm 00088 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 21941 Section 2, 28.7 mile segment of I–69 in the Counties of Gibson, Pike and Daviess. Notice is hereby given that, subsequent to the earlier FHWA notice, the USACE has taken final agency actions within the meaning of 23 U.S.C. 139(l)(1) by issuing permits and approvals for the highway project. The actions by the USACE, related final actions by other Federal agencies, and the laws under which such actions were taken, are described in the USACE decisions and its project records, referenced as Department of the Army (DA) Permit, Number LRL–2010–466. That information is available by contacting the USACE at the address provided above. On June 18, 2010, INDOT filed an application with the USACE for authorization under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1344, to construct the 28.7 mile Section 2 I–69 project. On April 1, 2011, the USACE took final action in issuing the Department of the Army (DA) Permit for the Section 2 I–69 project, Number LRL–2010–466, as described in the USACE decision and its administrative record for the project. As part of the Section 2 project, which begins at the northern terminus of the Section 1 project, there are 14 crossings of water resources requiring individual permits from the USACE, including streams, open water and emergent, scrub-shrub and forested wetlands. Subject to the permit conditions, INDOT is permitted to discharge 6,432 cubic yards of fill material below the Ordinary Highway Water Mark of 25,075 linear feet of stream channels, and to discharge 638,370 cubic yards of fill material into 16.41 acres of open water and emergent, scrub-shrub, and forested wetlands in constructing these 14 crossings. In addition, in two letters dated July 29, 2010 and September 29, 2010, the USACE has authorized impacts at 48 other sites under their jurisdiction within Section 2 of the I–69 project in Gibson, Pike and Davies Counties via the Regional General Permit No. 1 issued jointly by the Louisville and Chicago Districts on December 15, 2009. In the letter dated July 29, 2010 from Ms. Deborah Duda Snyder of the Indianapolis Regulatory Office of the USACE to Mr. Nathan Saxe of INDOT, the USACE verified that 10 individual stream and wetland impacts are authorized under the Regional General Permit No. 1 issued jointly by the Louisville and Chicago Districts on December 15, 2009. In the letter dated September 29, 2011 from Ms. Deborah Duda Snyder of the Indianapolis Regulatory Office of the USACE to Mr. E:\FR\FM\19APN1.SGM 19APN1 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 21942 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 75 / Tuesday, April 19, 2011 / Notices Nathan Saxe of INDOT, the USACE verified that an additional 38 individual stream and wetland impacts are authorized under the Regional General Permit No. 1 issued jointly by the Louisville and Chicago Districts on December 15, 2009, subject to special permit conditions requiring compensatory wetland and stream mitigation in accordance with approved ‘‘Mitigation and Monitoring Plans.’’ In addition, FHWA has approved five (5) Reevaluations of the Tier 2, Section 2 Record of Decision issued on August 13, 2010. The five Reevaluations of the Tier 2, Section 2 ROD include: (1) The October 6, 2010 Reevaluation, which was prepared to analyze the impacts of additional right-of-way areas (including right-of-way changes to accommodate storm water detention, elimination and additions of local service roads, cul-desac construction, existing bridge upgrades, building removal, mitigation, construction of access roads, spill containment, and to tie into Section 1 right-of-way) made necessary based on final design of segments 1 and 1A of Section 2 that were not analyzed in the Tier 2 Section 2 ROD or FEIS (approved April 18, 2010); (2) the December 6, 2010 Reevaluation, which was prepared to evaluate the impacts of permanent flood easements required for the final design of seventeen waterway bridge crossings within Section 2 and determine the changes in impacts to the affected environment from what was documented in the Tier 2 Section 2 ROD (approved April 18, 2010); (3) the December 8, 2010 Reevaluation, which was prepared to evaluate the impacts of additional right-of-way areas (including right-of-way changes to accommodate cul-de-sac construction, refined curve alignments, construction of local service roads to access landlocked parcels, and right-of-way revisions to follow surveyed parcel lines) in segments 2 and 3 of Section 2 made necessary based on final design that were not analyzed in the Tier 2 Section 2 ROD or FEIS; (4) the January 6, 2011 Reevaluation, which was prepared to analyze the impacts of additional right-of-way areas (including right-of-way changes to accommodate transmission tower relocation, connection highway right-of-way into existing right-of-way, removal of existing pavement, intersection realignment for improved safety, cul-desac construction, access drive construction, local service roads modifications, and improvements in sight distance) made necessary based on final design of segments 4 and 5 of Section 2 that were not analyzed in the Tier 2 Section 2 ROD or FEIS (approved VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:19 Apr 18, 2011 Jkt 223001 April 18, 2010); and (5) the January 13, 2011 Reevaluation, which was prepared to evaluate the impacts of minor rightof-way changes (including right-of-way changes to accommodate cul-de-sac construction, right-of-way shift to avoid a stream channel, side slope and ditching design to stay within right-ofway, construction of access drives and roadway profile changes, filling in the small remainder of an impacted pond, building removal, Local Service road modifications, right-of-way revisions to follow surveyed parcel lines, improvements to intersection sight distance, and right-of-way revisions to simplify acquisition and traffic maintenance) made necessary as a result of final design of segments 6 and 7 of Section 2 that were not analyzed in the Tier 2 Section 2 ROD or FEIS (approved April 18, 2010). The analysis completed in each of the five Reevaluations supports the FHWA’s conclusions that none of the changes examined will have impacts sufficient to require preparation of a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) or an additional Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for Section 2, and therefore that the Tier 2 Section 2 FEIS and ROD remain valid. The detailed analysis of the reevaluation documents along with the federal decision of minimal impact can be found on the project Web site at https:// www.i69indyevn.org/reevaluation.html. 3. Project: Section 3 of the I–69 highway project from Evansville to Indianapolis. Location: U.S. 50 east of the city of Washington, Indiana to U.S. 231 near the Crane NSWC, Daviess and Greene Counties. Notice is hereby given that the FHWA has approved two (2) Reevaluations of the Tier 2, Section 3 Record of Decision issued on January 28, 2010. Section 3 of the I–69 project extends from U.S. 50 east of the city of Washington, Indiana to U.S. 231 near the Crane NSWC. Section 3 is a new alignment, fully access-controlled highway. As approved in the Tier 1 ROD, the corridor is generally 2000-feet wide. The corridor width varies at two locations within Section 3. It narrows to 1200-feet wide near First Creek and expands to 6400-feet wide near the Thousand Acre Woods. The ROD selected Refined Preferred Alternative 1 for Section 3, as described in the I–69 Evansville to Indianapolis, Indiana, Tier 2 Final Environmental Impact Statement, Washington to Crane NSWC, Indiana (FEIS), available at https:// www.i69indyevn.org/ section3_FEIS.html. The ROD also approved the locations of the interchanges, grade separations, and PO 00000 Frm 00089 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 access roads (which include new roads, road relocations, and realignments). A Notice of Limitation on Claims for Judicial Review of Actions by FHWA and United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), DOI, was published in the Federal Register on February 25, 2010 (75 FR 8786–01). A claim seeking judicial review of the Tier 2, Section 3 decisions must have been filed by August 24, 2010, to avoid being barred under 23 U.S.C. 139(l). The two (2) Reevaluations of the Tier 2, Section 3 ROD include: (1) The September 29, 2010 Reevaluation, which was prepared to evaluate the impacts of additional right-of-way areas (including right-ofway changes to accommodate residential relocation, channel grading as part of hydraulic design, natural channel design, stream relocation of a Doan’s Creek tributary, barn removal, bridge upgrades, tie-in to existing rightof-way, and driveway reconstruction) made necessary as a result of final design of segments 10 through 13 of Section 3 that were not analyzed in the Tier 2 Section 3 ROD or FEIS (approved January 28, 2010); and (2) the November 17, 2010 Reevaluation Addendum (to the May 6, 2010 Reevaluation concerning flood easements in Section 3), which was prepared to evaluate the impacts of additional permanent flood easements required for the final design of Section 3 (including modification of flood easement boundaries at North Fork Prairie Creek and Epsom Lateral and acquisition of flood easements within the existing floodplain of North Fork Prairie Creek) and determine the changes in impacts to the affected environment from what was documented in the Tier 2 Section 3 ROD (approved January 28, 2010). The analysis completed in the Reevaluations supports the FHWA’s conclusions that none of the changes examined will have impacts sufficient to require preparation of a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) or an additional Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for Section 3, and therefore that the Tier 2 Section 3 FEIS and ROD remain valid. The detailed analysis of the reevaluation documents along with the Federal decision of minimal impact can be found on the project Web site at https:// www.i69indyevn.org/reevaluation.html. The actions by the Federal agencies on the project, and the laws under which such actions were taken, are described in the Reevaluation documents, the Department of the Army (DA) Permit and Regional General Permit letters (LRL–2010–466–djd), and in other documents in the FHWA E:\FR\FM\19APN1.SGM 19APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 75 / Tuesday, April 19, 2011 / Notices 3. On the Roseburg Subdivision between MP 507 and MP 509, near Glendale, OR, the removal of ABS signal numbers 5076/5077; 5082/5083 and 5089. Aspect changes would be made in signals 5034 and 5060. 4. On the Roseburg Subdivision between MP 559 and MP 563, near Dillard, OR, the removal of ABS signal numbers 5604/5605 and 5614/5615. Aspect changes would be made in (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance signals 563.3; 565.5; 559.2 and 557.4. Program Number 20.205, Highway Planning Interested parties are invited to and Construction. The regulations implementing Executive Order 12372 participate in these proceedings by regarding intergovernmental consultation on submitting written views, data, or Federal programs and activities apply to this comments. FRA does not anticipate program.) scheduling a public hearing in Authority: 23 U.S.C. 139(l)(1). connection with these proceedings since the facts do not appear to warrant a Max Azizi, hearing. If any interested party desires Acting Division Administrator, Indianapolis, an opportunity for oral comment, they Indiana. should notify FRA, in writing, before [FR Doc. 2011–9420 Filed 4–18–11; 8:45 am] the end of the comment period and BILLING CODE P specify the basis for their request. All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION appropriate docket number (e.g., Waiver Petition Docket Number FRA–2011– Federal Railroad Administration 0022) and may be submitted by any of the following methods: Notice of Application for Approval of • Web site: https:// Discontinuance or Modification of a www.regulations.gov. Follow the online Railroad Signal System instructions for submitting comments. Pursuant to Title 49 Code of Federal • Fax: 202–493–2251. Regulations (CFR) Part 235 and 49 • Mail: Docket Operations Facility, U.S.C. 20502(a), the following railroad U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 has petitioned the Federal Railroad New Jersey Avenue, SE., W12–140, Administration (FRA) seeking approval Washington, DC 20590. for the discontinuance or modification • Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey of the signal system, as detailed below. Avenue, SE., Room W12–140, Docket Number FRA–2011–0022 Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, Applicant: Central Oregon & Pacific Railroad, Inc., Mr. Steve Hefley, General except Federal holidays. Communications received within 45 Manager, 333 S.E. Mosher Avenue, P.O. days of the date of this notice will be Box 1083, Roseburg, Oregon 97470. considered by FRA before final action is The Central Oregon & Pacific taken. Comments received after that Railroad, Inc. (CORP) seeks approval of date will be considered as far as the proposed discontinuance and practicable. All written communications removal of the automatic block signal concerning these proceedings are system (ABS) on three sections of the available for examination during regular Roseburg Subdivision and on one section of the Siskiyou Subdivision. The business hours (9 a.m.–5 p.m.) at the above facility. All documents in the proposal consists of: public docket are also available for 1. On the Roseburg and Siskiyou inspection and copying on the Internet Subdivisions between milepost (MP) at the docket facility’s Web site at 438.7 and MP 451, near Medford, OR, https://www.regulations.gov. the removal of ABS signal numbers Anyone is able to search the 427.4D; 4284/4283; 4298/4297; 4328/ 4327; 4358/4357; 4388/4389; 4406/4407; electronic form of any written communications and comments 4424/4423; 4444/4443; 4456/4457 and received into any of our dockets by the 4482/4483. An aspect change would be name of the individual submitting the made in signal 4505. document (or signing the document, if 2. On the Roseburg Subdivision submitted on behalf of an association, between MP 471 and MP 475, near business, labor union, etc.). You may Grants Pass, OR, the removal of ABS review DOT’s complete Privacy Act signal numbers 4724/4725 and 4734/ 4735. Aspect changes would be made in Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (Volume signals 4783; 4751; 4684 and 4712. mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES administrative record for the project. The ROD and other documents from the FHWA administrative record files for the Section 1, Section 2, and Section 3 projects are available by contacting FHWA, USACE or INDOT at the addresses provided above. Project information may also be available through the INDOT I–69 Project Web site at https://www.i69indyevn.org/. VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:19 Apr 18, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00090 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 21943 65, Number 70; Page 19477) or at https://www.dot.gov/privacy.html. Issued in Washington, DC, on April 13, 2011. Robert C. Lauby, Deputy Associate Administrator for Regulatory and Legislative Operations. [FR Doc. 2011–9386 Filed 4–18–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–06–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Railroad Administration Petition for Waiver of Compliance In accordance with part 211 of title 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), notice is hereby given that the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) has received a request for a waiver of compliance from certain requirements of its safety standards. The individual petition is described below, including the party seeking relief, the regulatory provisions involved, the nature of the relief being requested, and the petitioner’s arguments in favor of relief. Illinois Railway Museum [Waiver Petition Docket Number FRA–2011– 0017] The Illinois Railway Museum (IRYM) seeks a waiver of compliance with the Steam Locomotive Inspection and Maintenance Standards, 49 CFR 230.17, as they pertain to the requirement for 1,472 service day inspection for steam locomotive number 1630. Locomotive number 1630’s 1,472 day inspection is due to expire in July, 2011, and IRYM requests the locomotive be allowed to continue in service until July, 2016, or after 1,472 service days, whichever is earlier. Alternately, IRYM requests an extension through October, 2011. IRYM is not requesting waiver of any other inspection requirements, and is specifically not requesting extension of the requirement to conduct the § 230.17 inspection after 1,472 service days. Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested party desires an opportunity for oral comment, they should notify FRA, in writing, before the end of the comment period and specify the basis for their request. All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the appropriate docket number (e.g., Waiver Petition Docket Number FRA–2011– E:\FR\FM\19APN1.SGM 19APN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 75 (Tuesday, April 19, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21940-21943]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-9420]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Highway Administration


Notice of Final Federal Agency Actions on Proposed Highway in 
Indiana

AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of limitation on claims for judicial review of actions 
by FHWA and United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), DoD.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice announces actions taken by the FHWA and the USACE 
that are final within the meaning of 23 U.S.C. 139(l)(1). The actions 
relate to proposed highway projects for a 28.7 mile segment of I-69 in 
the Counties of Gibson, Pike and Daviess, State of Indiana, and grant 
licenses, permits, and approvals for the project.

DATES: By this notice, the FHWA is advising the public of final agency 
actions subject to 23 U.S.C. 139(l)(1) and are final within the meaning 
of that law. A claim seeking judicial review of those Federal agency 
actions that are covered by this notice will be barred unless the claim 
is filed on or before October 16, 2011. If the Federal law that 
authorizes judicial review of a claim provides a time period of less 
than 180 days for filing such claim, then the shorter time period 
applies.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For the FHWA: Ms. Michelle Allen, 
Federal Highway Administration, Indiana Division, 575 North 
Pennsylvania Street, Room 254, Indianapolis, IN 46204-1576; telephone: 
(317) 226-7344; e-mail: Michelle.Allen@dot.gov. The FHWA Indiana 
Division Office's normal business hours are 7:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., e.t. 
For the USACE: Mr. Greg McKay, Chief, North Section Regulatory Branch, 
Louisville District, United States Army Corps of Engineers, P.O. Box 
59, Louisville, KY 40201-0059; telephone: (502) 315-6685; e-mail: 
gregory.a.mckay@usace.army.mil. Normal business hours are 8 a.m. to 5 
p.m., e.t. You may also contact Mr. Thomas Seeman, Project Manager, 
Indiana Department of Transportation (INDOT), 100 North Senate Avenue, 
Indianapolis, IN 46204; telephone: (317) 232-5336; e-mail: 
TSeeman@indot.IN.gov. Normal business hours for the Indiana Department 
of Transportation are: 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., e.t.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that the FHWA and 
other Federal agencies have taken final agency actions by issuing 
licenses, permits, and approvals for the highway projects in the State 
of Indiana that are listed below. The actions by the Federal agencies 
on a project, and the laws under which such actions were taken, are 
described in the Record of Decision (ROD), Reevaluation Documents to 
the final environmental impact statements (FEIS) issued in connection 
with the projects, Section 404 Discharge of Dredged or Fill Material 
Permit and Regional General Permit letters, and in other documents in 
the FHWA administrative record for the project. The ROD and other 
documents from the FHWA administrative record files for the listed 
projects are available by contacting the FHWA or the Indiana Department 
of Transportation (INDOT) at the addresses provided above. Project 
information may also be available through the INDOT I-69 Project Web 
site at https://www.i69indyevn.org/. People unable to access the Web 
site may contact FHWA or INDOT at the addresses listed above. This 
notice applies to all Federal agency decisions on the listed project as 
of the issuance date of this notice and all laws under which such 
actions were taken, including but not limited to: 1. National 
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) [42 U.S.C. 4321-4351]. 2. Endangered 
Species Act [16 U.S.C. 1531-1544]. 3. Federal-Aid Highway Act [23 
U.S.C. 109 and 23 U.S.C. 128]. 4. Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7401-
7671(q). 5. Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 
1966 [49 U.S.C. 303]. 6. Section 106 of the National Historic 
Preservation Act of 1966, as amended [16 U.S.C. 470(f) et seq.]. 7. 
Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act [16 U.S.C. 688-688d]. 8. Clean 
Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251-1377 (Section 404, Section 402, Section 401, 
Section 319). Previous actions taken by the USFWS for the Tier 1, I-69 
project, pursuant to the Endangered Species Act,

[[Page 21941]]

16 U.S.C. 1531-1544, included its concurrence with the FHWA's 
determination that the I-69 project was not likely to adversely affect 
the eastern fanshell mussel (Cyprogenia stegaria) and that the project 
was likely to adversely affect, but not jeopardize, the bald eagle. The 
USFWS also concluded that the project was not likely to jeopardize the 
continued existence of the Indiana bat and was not likely to adversely 
modify the bat's designated Critical Habitat. These USFWS decisions 
were described in the Programmatic Biological Opinion issued on 
December 3, 2003, the Revised Programmatic Biological Opinion issued on 
August 24, 2006, and other documents in the Tier 1 project records. A 
Notice of Limitation on Claims for Judicial Review of these actions and 
decisions by the USFWS, DOI, was published in the Federal Register on 
April 17, 2007. A claim seeking judicial review of the Tier 1 decisions 
must have been filed by October 15, 2007, to avoid being barred under 
23 U.S.C. 139(l).
    The projects subject to this notice are:
    1. Project: Section 1 of the I-69 highway project from Evansville 
to Indianapolis. Location: I-64 just north of Evansville to just north 
of SR 64 west of Oakland City. Notice is hereby given that, subsequent 
to the earlier FHWA notice, the FHWA has taken final agency actions 
within the meaning of 23 U.S.C. 139(l)(1) by approving three (3) 
Reevaluations of the Tier 2, Section 1 Record of Decision issued on 
December 12, 2007. Section 1 of the I-69 project extends from I-64 just 
north of Evansville to just north of SR 64 west of Oakland City. 
Section 1 is a new alignment, fully access-controlled highway. As 
approved in the Tier 1 ROD, the corridor is generally 2000-feet wide. 
The ROD selected Preferred Alternative 4 for Section 1, as described in 
the I-69 Evansville to Indianapolis, Indiana, Tier 2 Final 
Environmental Impact Statement, Evansville to Oakland City, Indiana 
(FEIS), available at https://www.i69indyevn.org/section1_FEIS.html. The 
ROD also approved the locations of the interchanges, grade separations, 
and access roads (which include new roads, road relocations, and 
realignments). On February 1, 2008, the FHWA published a ``Notice of 
Limitation on Claims for Judicial Review of Actions by FHWA and United 
States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), DOI'' in the Federal Register 
at (73 FR 6241-01) for the Section 1, 13.1 mile segment of I-69 in the 
Counties of Warrick and Gibson. A claim seeking judicial review of the 
Tier 2, Section 1 decisions must have been filed by July 30, 2008, to 
avoid being barred under 23 U.S.C. 139(l). The three (3) Reevaluations 
of the Tier 2, Section 1 ROD include: (1) The March 20, 2009 
Reevaluation, which was prepared to evaluate the effects of additional 
right-of-way and improvements (including right-of-way required for bank 
stabilization, drainage improvements, guard-rail, cul-de-sacs, and a 
potential levee) made necessary based on final design that were not 
analyzed in the Tier 2 Section 1 ROD or FEIS (approved December 12, 
2007); (2) the December 13, 2010 Reevaluation, which was prepared to 
evaluate the impacts of additional right-of-way areas (including right-
of-way required to accommodate cul-de-sac construction, right-of-way 
shift to avoid a stream channel, stream channel realignment and tree 
planting, berm construction around existing oil storage tanks, driveway 
construction, interchange and grade modifications, and flood easements) 
made necessary based on final design that were not analyzed in the Tier 
2 Section 1 ROD or FEIS (approved December 12, 2007); and (3) the 
February 17, 2011 Reevaluation, which was prepared to evaluate the 
impacts of additional right-of-way areas (including right-of-way 
required to accommodate cul-de-sac construction, building removal, cut 
sections through hills, driveway reconstruction, interchange 
modifications, erosion control, fill-in remainder portions of impacted 
ponds, construction of a connector road, drainage easements, and 
revised right-of-way to even station and offset) made necessary based 
on final design that were not analyzed in the Tier 2 Section 1 ROD or 
FEIS (approved December 12, 2007). The analysis in each of the 
Reevaluations supports the FHWA's conclusions that none of the changes 
examined will have impacts sufficient to require preparation of a 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) or an additional 
Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for Section 1, and 
therefore that the Tier 2 Section 1 FEIS and ROD remain valid. The 
detailed analysis of the reevaluation documents along with the Federal 
decision of minimal impact can be found on the project Web site at 
https://www.i69indyevn.org/reevaluation.html.
    2. Project: Section 2 of the I-69 highway project from Evansville 
to Indianapolis. Location: Oakland City, Indiana to Washington, 
Indiana, Gibson, Pike and Daviess Counties. On August 13, 2010, the 
FHWA published a ``Notice of Final Federal Agency Actions on Proposed 
Highway in Indiana'' in the Federal Register at (75 FR 49547) for the 
Section 2, 28.7 mile segment of I-69 in the Counties of Gibson, Pike 
and Daviess. Notice is hereby given that, subsequent to the earlier 
FHWA notice, the USACE has taken final agency actions within the 
meaning of 23 U.S.C. 139(l)(1) by issuing permits and approvals for the 
highway project. The actions by the USACE, related final actions by 
other Federal agencies, and the laws under which such actions were 
taken, are described in the USACE decisions and its project records, 
referenced as Department of the Army (DA) Permit, Number LRL-2010-466. 
That information is available by contacting the USACE at the address 
provided above.
    On June 18, 2010, INDOT filed an application with the USACE for 
authorization under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1344, 
to construct the 28.7 mile Section 2 I-69 project. On April 1, 2011, 
the USACE took final action in issuing the Department of the Army (DA) 
Permit for the Section 2 I-69 project, Number LRL-2010-466, as 
described in the USACE decision and its administrative record for the 
project. As part of the Section 2 project, which begins at the northern 
terminus of the Section 1 project, there are 14 crossings of water 
resources requiring individual permits from the USACE, including 
streams, open water and emergent, scrub-shrub and forested wetlands. 
Subject to the permit conditions, INDOT is permitted to discharge 6,432 
cubic yards of fill material below the Ordinary Highway Water Mark of 
25,075 linear feet of stream channels, and to discharge 638,370 cubic 
yards of fill material into 16.41 acres of open water and emergent, 
scrub-shrub, and forested wetlands in constructing these 14 crossings. 
In addition, in two letters dated July 29, 2010 and September 29, 2010, 
the USACE has authorized impacts at 48 other sites under their 
jurisdiction within Section 2 of the I-69 project in Gibson, Pike and 
Davies Counties via the Regional General Permit No. 1 issued jointly by 
the Louisville and Chicago Districts on December 15, 2009. In the 
letter dated July 29, 2010 from Ms. Deborah Duda Snyder of the 
Indianapolis Regulatory Office of the USACE to Mr. Nathan Saxe of 
INDOT, the USACE verified that 10 individual stream and wetland impacts 
are authorized under the Regional General Permit No. 1 issued jointly 
by the Louisville and Chicago Districts on December 15, 2009. In the 
letter dated September 29, 2011 from Ms. Deborah Duda Snyder of the 
Indianapolis Regulatory Office of the USACE to Mr.

[[Page 21942]]

Nathan Saxe of INDOT, the USACE verified that an additional 38 
individual stream and wetland impacts are authorized under the Regional 
General Permit No. 1 issued jointly by the Louisville and Chicago 
Districts on December 15, 2009, subject to special permit conditions 
requiring compensatory wetland and stream mitigation in accordance with 
approved ``Mitigation and Monitoring Plans.''
    In addition, FHWA has approved five (5) Reevaluations of the Tier 
2, Section 2 Record of Decision issued on August 13, 2010. The five 
Reevaluations of the Tier 2, Section 2 ROD include: (1) The October 6, 
2010 Reevaluation, which was prepared to analyze the impacts of 
additional right-of-way areas (including right-of-way changes to 
accommodate storm water detention, elimination and additions of local 
service roads, cul-de-sac construction, existing bridge upgrades, 
building removal, mitigation, construction of access roads, spill 
containment, and to tie into Section 1 right-of-way) made necessary 
based on final design of segments 1 and 1A of Section 2 that were not 
analyzed in the Tier 2 Section 2 ROD or FEIS (approved April 18, 2010); 
(2) the December 6, 2010 Reevaluation, which was prepared to evaluate 
the impacts of permanent flood easements required for the final design 
of seventeen waterway bridge crossings within Section 2 and determine 
the changes in impacts to the affected environment from what was 
documented in the Tier 2 Section 2 ROD (approved April 18, 2010); (3) 
the December 8, 2010 Reevaluation, which was prepared to evaluate the 
impacts of additional right-of-way areas (including right-of-way 
changes to accommodate cul-de-sac construction, refined curve 
alignments, construction of local service roads to access landlocked 
parcels, and right-of-way revisions to follow surveyed parcel lines) in 
segments 2 and 3 of Section 2 made necessary based on final design that 
were not analyzed in the Tier 2 Section 2 ROD or FEIS; (4) the January 
6, 2011 Reevaluation, which was prepared to analyze the impacts of 
additional right-of-way areas (including right-of-way changes to 
accommodate transmission tower relocation, connection highway right-of-
way into existing right-of-way, removal of existing pavement, 
intersection realignment for improved safety, cul-de-sac construction, 
access drive construction, local service roads modifications, and 
improvements in sight distance) made necessary based on final design of 
segments 4 and 5 of Section 2 that were not analyzed in the Tier 2 
Section 2 ROD or FEIS (approved April 18, 2010); and (5) the January 
13, 2011 Reevaluation, which was prepared to evaluate the impacts of 
minor right-of-way changes (including right-of-way changes to 
accommodate cul-de-sac construction, right-of-way shift to avoid a 
stream channel, side slope and ditching design to stay within right-of-
way, construction of access drives and roadway profile changes, filling 
in the small remainder of an impacted pond, building removal, Local 
Service road modifications, right-of-way revisions to follow surveyed 
parcel lines, improvements to intersection sight distance, and right-
of-way revisions to simplify acquisition and traffic maintenance) made 
necessary as a result of final design of segments 6 and 7 of Section 2 
that were not analyzed in the Tier 2 Section 2 ROD or FEIS (approved 
April 18, 2010). The analysis completed in each of the five 
Reevaluations supports the FHWA's conclusions that none of the changes 
examined will have impacts sufficient to require preparation of a 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) or an additional 
Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for Section 2, and 
therefore that the Tier 2 Section 2 FEIS and ROD remain valid. The 
detailed analysis of the reevaluation documents along with the federal 
decision of minimal impact can be found on the project Web site at 
https://www.i69indyevn.org/reevaluation.html.
    3. Project: Section 3 of the I-69 highway project from Evansville 
to Indianapolis. Location: U.S. 50 east of the city of Washington, 
Indiana to U.S. 231 near the Crane NSWC, Daviess and Greene Counties. 
Notice is hereby given that the FHWA has approved two (2) Reevaluations 
of the Tier 2, Section 3 Record of Decision issued on January 28, 2010. 
Section 3 of the I-69 project extends from U.S. 50 east of the city of 
Washington, Indiana to U.S. 231 near the Crane NSWC. Section 3 is a new 
alignment, fully access-controlled highway. As approved in the Tier 1 
ROD, the corridor is generally 2000-feet wide. The corridor width 
varies at two locations within Section 3. It narrows to 1200-feet wide 
near First Creek and expands to 6400-feet wide near the Thousand Acre 
Woods. The ROD selected Refined Preferred Alternative 1 for Section 3, 
as described in the I-69 Evansville to Indianapolis, Indiana, Tier 2 
Final Environmental Impact Statement, Washington to Crane NSWC, Indiana 
(FEIS), available at https://www.i69indyevn.org/section3_FEIS.html. The 
ROD also approved the locations of the interchanges, grade separations, 
and access roads (which include new roads, road relocations, and 
realignments). A Notice of Limitation on Claims for Judicial Review of 
Actions by FHWA and United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), 
DOI, was published in the Federal Register on February 25, 2010 (75 FR 
8786-01). A claim seeking judicial review of the Tier 2, Section 3 
decisions must have been filed by August 24, 2010, to avoid being 
barred under 23 U.S.C. 139(l). The two (2) Reevaluations of the Tier 2, 
Section 3 ROD include: (1) The September 29, 2010 Reevaluation, which 
was prepared to evaluate the impacts of additional right-of-way areas 
(including right-of-way changes to accommodate residential relocation, 
channel grading as part of hydraulic design, natural channel design, 
stream relocation of a Doan's Creek tributary, barn removal, bridge 
upgrades, tie-in to existing right-of-way, and driveway reconstruction) 
made necessary as a result of final design of segments 10 through 13 of 
Section 3 that were not analyzed in the Tier 2 Section 3 ROD or FEIS 
(approved January 28, 2010); and (2) the November 17, 2010 Reevaluation 
Addendum (to the May 6, 2010 Reevaluation concerning flood easements in 
Section 3), which was prepared to evaluate the impacts of additional 
permanent flood easements required for the final design of Section 3 
(including modification of flood easement boundaries at North Fork 
Prairie Creek and Epsom Lateral and acquisition of flood easements 
within the existing floodplain of North Fork Prairie Creek) and 
determine the changes in impacts to the affected environment from what 
was documented in the Tier 2 Section 3 ROD (approved January 28, 2010). 
The analysis completed in the Reevaluations supports the FHWA's 
conclusions that none of the changes examined will have impacts 
sufficient to require preparation of a Supplemental Environmental 
Impact Statement (SEIS) or an additional Draft Environmental Impact 
Statement (DEIS) for Section 3, and therefore that the Tier 2 Section 3 
FEIS and ROD remain valid. The detailed analysis of the reevaluation 
documents along with the Federal decision of minimal impact can be 
found on the project Web site at https://www.i69indyevn.org/reevaluation.html.
    The actions by the Federal agencies on the project, and the laws 
under which such actions were taken, are described in the Reevaluation 
documents, the Department of the Army (DA) Permit and Regional General 
Permit letters (LRL-2010-466-djd), and in other documents in the FHWA

[[Page 21943]]

administrative record for the project. The ROD and other documents from 
the FHWA administrative record files for the Section 1, Section 2, and 
Section 3 projects are available by contacting FHWA, USACE or INDOT at 
the addresses provided above. Project information may also be available 
through the INDOT I-69 Project Web site at https://www.i69indyevn.org/.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Number 20.205, 
Highway Planning and Construction. The regulations implementing 
Executive Order 12372 regarding intergovernmental consultation on 
Federal programs and activities apply to this program.)

    Authority: 23 U.S.C. 139(l)(1).

Max Azizi,
Acting Division Administrator, Indianapolis, Indiana.
[FR Doc. 2011-9420 Filed 4-18-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.